Check out Sunday’s Times Union story on Raucci case

SCHENECTADY — The trial of Steven C. Raucci begins Monday — and with it may come clarification as to how involved, if at all, school officials were with a man accused of terrorizing fellow employees.

Raucci, the city school district’s former facilities supervisor and CSEA unit president is facing 26 criminal charges, including allegations that since 1993 he has placed homemade explosive devices at homes and on cars in an attempt to solidify his personal and professional authority. He has been in jail without bail since his Feb. 20, 2009 arrest.

The charges would be noteworthy if they were made against anyone. But the fact that the allegations involved a school community, and that questions continue to swirl even a year later about what administrators might have known, make Raucci’s trial a possible powder keg of information.

The criminal charges against the 61-year-old Niskayuna man have cast a pall over the entire district that is unlikely to lift anytime soon.
Details about what to expect during the trial, and potential witnesses, have yet to be revealed. Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney, who in a rare move is prosecuting the case himself, said last week that any advance discussion about the prosecution’s strategy would taint the jury pool. He has said the trial could last a month. Defense Attorney Ronald DeAngelus declined comment.

Testimony and documents released in pretrial motions point to a link between the criminal charges and Raucci’s work for the school district. Raucci initially was charged with blowing up a door at a Rotterdam house.
Carney has said in court that Raucci made school employees work on his house, opened people’s paychecks in front of co-workers and threatened to fire or demote employees, telling them his union post would enable him to quash grievances filed against him.
Schools Superintendent Eric Ely commented on a few aspects of the Raucci case at first, saying the district was cooperating fully with prosecutors and that it would review overtime and expense reports from dates on which Raucci is accused of having deck work done at his house with school
materials.
The school district went silent since last spring, when notice of civil lawsuits began to be filed by school workers claiming administrators knew about Raucci allegedly harassing and intimidating them.

One complaint filed in U.S. District Court in July alleges Human Resources Director Michael Stricos laughed in a worker’s face when the employee told him he couldn’t work under Raucci’s threats. The worker had previously expressed interest in running for Raucci’s union post.

The district has fought for, and so far has won, the legal right to keep the results of its internal investigation of Raucci a secret. Former school board member Joyce Wachala has filed an appeal with the state Education Department seeking release of the results of the investigation, citing testimony contained within it that Raucci and former school board President Jeff Janiszewski used employees on their jobs to help school board members win elections. Janiszewski has adamantly denied the claims.

It’s unknown whether school district employees will be called to the stand. According to documents released by Carney’s office during Raucci’s first bail hearing, school workers might have been privy to Raucci’s discussion of his alleged crimes. A deposition by a school employee said Raucci repeatedly talked at school morning meetings about how if he had a terminal illness he wouldn’t allow two people he knew to outlive him.

It’s possible that former athletics director Gary DiNola might testify to discuss the feud that allegedly led to Raucci placing a quarter-stick of dynamite on the windshield of DiNola’s sport utility vehicle in November 2006. Prosecutors say Raucci wanted to exact revenge after DiNola complained to administrators about arguments between the two employees over control and access to school sports facilities and equipment.

Ely has met with Carney. Carney has said there is no current evidence that school officials engaged in criminal activity.

In the last few months, the school district has attempted to be more open in other matters, such as posting videos of its recent budget discussions on its Web site and inviting the public join school board committees. But considering the scrutiny still bearing down on it, can the district endure weeks’ worth of testimony that might make administrators look even worse?

“Of course it is a distraction, because the school district name is frequently mentioned. It’s been a distraction for the last year,” said school board President Maxine Brisport, who became the board’s leader this past summer. “It’s my hope we can get past it soon.”

No matter what is revealed, a changing of the guard is expected. Human Resources Director Michael Stricos is retiring before the end of the school year, and the contract of Business Assistant Superintendent Michael San Angelo, who also was mentioned in some civil court filings, has not been renewed. Ely has put his house up for sale and has applied for jobs out of town, most recently interviewing at a public forum last week for a superintendent job in Erie, Pa.

About 16 petitions have already been picked up for May’s school board election, and it appears only President Maxine Brisport will be running for re-election among four slots open.

“I’ve never seen such a unanimous feeling for a need for change,” said Schenectady Mayor Brian U. Stratton about the city school district. “I think the people who don’t want to see it happen know it will happen soon.”

Lauren Stanforth can be reached at 454-5697 or by e-mail at lstanforth@timesunion.com.

3 Responses

I was duped into buying a Sunday Times Union with it’s “print edition exclusive” story on the Racci case. I say duped because I expected a detailed, in depth account and analysis of the events leading up to this point, in all of its intricacies, however what I got was a mere rehash of everything that has already been printed combined with an absolute lack of depth. In fact, the Sunday Gazette had a much more detailed and complete account of the case in their edition, and I would like to know how the TU can justify calling this article an exclusive anything. What a waste of money.

Hopefully, the Raucci case will teach school districts a valuable lesson about the importance of not sweeping things under the rug. The happenings in Schenectady are an extreme, nearly unimaginable example of one district ignoring unimaginable wrong doing, but trust me, all districts ignore a great many things and they do so purposely, to keep the tax payers ignorant and trusting, the police out of their affairs, and the parents happy.